White Linen In The Heights

[TGM]

Machete? How primitive.

All good Heights residents know that a duel is the proper (and historic) method of solving disputes.

http://artofmanliness.com/2010/03/05/man-knowledge-an-affair-of-honor-the-duel/

[s3mh]

s3mh doesn't realize that John Nova Lomax is one of the best reporters in town. I would tend to believe most of what he says as being reasonably accurate.

Accuracy involves a lot more than correctly reporting what the lady who runs the Boom Boom Room said. Lomax makes a big stink about how much Cohen wanted to get paid and the fact that Cohen also wanted to make money off of his arts market. But, Lomax does not provide the proper context. First, 22k is not a lot of money compared to what professionals would charge. I have directed much smaller events on a voluntary basis. It was a ton of work to get a small event (500-1000 people) put together. Getting vendors, the City permitting and volunteers set up took @20 hours a week for @4-6 weeks. WLN is a huge and complicated event. I am sure that it was a 24/7 job the last few weeks leading up to it. Given that there are very few people who can ditch their day job to dedicate themselve to directing an event like WLN, it is only fair that the person hired get a premium just for actually being available to do it. Second, Cohen makes money doing his arts market once a month all year long. Why shouldn't he be able to do that during WLN? A 501©3 could have simply hired Cohen to bring his for profit arts market to WLN as part of the entertainment for the evening, no different than hiring the loud bands on 19th street. People only got squeemish when Cohen presented it in conjunction with him getting paid to direct the event. One organization got over-lawyered and balked at it instead of working with Cohen to structure it to be legal. But Lomax thinks all of this is the devil's work because he did not take the time to understand the issues. Instead, if someone said "this looks bad", he reported that instead of trying to actually understand if it actually was bad.

[LTAWACS]

Make them pay.

[rlf715]

The $22,500.00 figure quoted was for a group of people not just Mitch. That is just one of the many mistakes in the article.

[kylejack]

Accuracy involves a lot more than correctly reporting what the lady who runs the Boom Boom Room said. Lomax makes a big stink about how much Cohen wanted to get paid and the fact that Cohen also wanted to make money off of his arts market. But, Lomax does not provide the proper context. First, 22k is not a lot of money compared to what professionals would charge. I have directed much smaller events on a voluntary basis. It was a ton of work to get a small event (500-1000 people) put together. Getting vendors, the City permitting and volunteers set up took @20 hours a week for @4-6 weeks. WLN is a huge and complicated event. I am sure that it was a 24/7 job the last few weeks leading up to it. Given that there are very few people who can ditch their day job to dedicate themselve to directing an event like WLN, it is only fair that the person hired get a premium just for actually being available to do it. Second, Cohen makes money doing his arts market once a month all year long. Why shouldn't he be able to do that during WLN? A 501©3 could have simply hired Cohen to bring his for profit arts market to WLN as part of the entertainment for the evening, no different than hiring the loud bands on 19th street. People only got squeemish when Cohen presented it in conjunction with him getting paid to direct the event. One organization got over-lawyered and balked at it instead of working with Cohen to structure it to be legal. But Lomax thinks all of this is the devil's work because he did not take the time to understand the issues. Instead, if someone said "this looks bad", he reported that instead of trying to actually understand if it actually was bad.

$27K is some pretty nice cheddar for nine weeks work. What is Cohen's day-job, anyway?

[pigsplay]

Mitch Cohen never made 27 k, end of story.

[kylejack]

Mitch Cohen never made 27 k, end of story.

I know, and HP didn't say he did. Rather, that's what he stood to make if his wishes had been granted (Him being paid what he requested, and WLN covering the electricity costs for Arts Market.)

[pigsplay]

His wishes? Yeah, ok.

As for his day job, don't know, don't care.

rlf715 thanks for the post. John is beyond incompetent with his so called story. He had a few bones to pick with Cohen, and should have left it off his story, a pathetic attempt at that. This crazed lunatic that owns BBR is a jew hater (a sources words, not mine). She also isn't pleased with other types of individuals, be it their skin color or whatnot.

[pigsplay]

Accuracy involves a lot more than correctly reporting what the lady who runs the Boom Boom Room said. Lomax makes a big stink about how much Cohen wanted to get paid and the fact that Cohen also wanted to make money off of his arts market. But, Lomax does not provide the proper context. First, 22k is not a lot of money compared to what professionals would charge. I have directed much smaller events on a voluntary basis. It was a ton of work to get a small event (500-1000 people) put together. Getting vendors, the City permitting and volunteers set up took @20 hours a week for @4-6 weeks. WLN is a huge and complicated event. I am sure that it was a 24/7 job the last few weeks leading up to it. Given that there are very few people who can ditch their day job to dedicate themselve to directing an event like WLN, it is only fair that the person hired get a premium just for actually being available to do it. Second, Cohen makes money doing his arts market once a month all year long. Why shouldn't he be able to do that during WLN? A 501©3 could have simply hired Cohen to bring his for profit arts market to WLN as part of the entertainment for the evening, no different than hiring the loud bands on 19th street. People only got squeemish when Cohen presented it in conjunction with him getting paid to direct the event. One organization got over-lawyered and balked at it instead of working with Cohen to structure it to be legal. But Lomax thinks all of this is the devil's work because he did not take the time to understand the issues. Instead, if someone said "this looks bad", he reported that instead of trying to actually understand if it actually was bad.

^Exactly, and then some.

Reading that Jlomax is the best reporter around, I'm scared of what bad reporting would look like.

[pigsplay]

while I'm at it, perhaps johnlo needs to get laid, maybe it'll help him relax.

[kylejack]

Okay, now we have unsourced claims of anti-semitism from a poster who registered an account 4 hours ago.

[RedScare]

I'm not going there. I'll just stick with what the woman bragged about in the article.

Here's where I'm at. It seems that this article succeeded in two things: 1) the Boom Boom Room and its owner are not worthy of my patronage or money, and, 2) John Lomax has ruined whatever reputation he may have had as a unbiased reporter. I doubt that neither 1) nor 2) was intended by the writer or his prime source. Such is the law of unintended consequences. Or, what goes around comes around. Take your pick.

Look at how much time I'll save in not reading the Press or going to the boom boom room!

[Flashman]

Just an FYI - you can call any towing company to came and tow a car blocking your driveway. You don't have to call the cops.

The tow truck drivers fight for that commission, because they always get paid.

[kylejack]

I'm not going there. I'll just stick with what the woman bragged about in the article.

Here's where I'm at. It seems that this article succeeded in two things: 1) the Boom Boom Room and its owner are not worthy of my patronage or money, and, 2) John Lomax has ruined whatever reputation he may have had as a unbiased reporter. I doubt that neither 1) nor 2) was intended by the writer or his prime source. Such is the law of unintended consequences. Or, what goes around comes around. Take your pick.

Look at how much time I'll save in not reading the Press or going to the boom boom room!

I don't see any bias in the article, just both sides telling their story, and Cohen essentially acknowledging that the core claim is true: She paid to be listed on a map and wasn't. If you consider the machete incident damning, then why would you think he biased his article in favor of this woman? Sounds to me like it's a great inclusion for you to hate her bar, or whatever.

[samagon]

Just an FYI - you can call any towing company to came and tow a car blocking your driveway. You don't have to call the cops.

The tow truck drivers fight for that commission, because they always get paid.

Not in defense of brandishing a machete, but was this true at the time the events occurred? The article seems to make it sound like it happened quite a while back.

[RedScare]

I don't see any bias in the article, just both sides telling their story, and Cohen essentially acknowledging that the core claim is true: She paid to be listed on a map and wasn't. If you consider the machete incident damning, then why would you think he biased his article in favor of this woman? Sounds to me like it's a great inclusion for you to hate her bar, or whatever.

I have some inside information that I am not willing to share on a public forum. But, hey, if she sounds like your kind of wine bar owner, it is easy enough to find and patronize. Enjoy!

Not in defense of brandishing a machete, but was this true at the time the events occurred? The article seems to make it sound like it happened quite a while back.

It has always been legal to tow someone blocking your driveway. I found this out in 1986 on lower Westheimer. No one brandished a machete, either.

[kylejack]

I have some inside information that I am not willing to share on a public forum. But, hey, if she sounds like your kind of wine bar owner, it is easy enough to find and patronize. Enjoy!

Nope, haven't said anything nice about her and don't want to go to her dumb bar.

[Ross]

Not in defense of brandishing a machete, but was this true at the time the events occurred? The article seems to make it sound like it happened quite a while back.

That's been the law for some time, according to my in-laws who have tow trucks. However, they would be the first to tell you that it's not always the smartest thing to have someone's car towed without trying to speak to them first.

[kylejack]

That's been the law for some time, according to my in-laws who have tow trucks. However, they would be the first to tell you that it's not always the smartest thing to have someone's car towed without trying to speak to them first.

I don't think they meant with a machete!

[fwki]

I don't see any bias in the article, just both sides telling their story, and Cohen essentially acknowledging that the core claim is true: She paid to be listed on a map and wasn't. If you consider the machete incident damning, then why would you think he biased his article in favor of this woman? Sounds to me like it's a great inclusion for you to hate her bar, or whatever.

I agree. Lomax let this women sink her own ship. And did you see that picture of her he included with the article? The Thought Police could have arrested her on the spot for hate crimes. The first paragraph has her acting like a fool with a machete, calls the place a "cantina" twice with "unsavory" clientele, pins "Mexican Mafia " descriptor on the owner and questions his deed ownership status as "putative".

Take a look at HCAD records and you'll see her business partner (at a minimum) Walter Shannon owning her "Sunset Heights Bungalow" next door since 1998 and the Boom Boom property itself 2000-2005. Since 2005 an LLC controlled by both Shannon and the woman owns the Boom property. The woman herself owned the Boom property1998-2000 and before that it was not a Mexican Mafioso but a white artist named Jesse Cougot from 1988-1998. So her whole story sounds like BS, and I bet Lomax had his doubts but couldn't pass up letting her reveal her own warped mind.

[kylejack]

Hm, maybe she was the landlord and her tenant was someone else? They say she "engineered" a takeover or something, so maybe she just evicted her tenant?

[heights_yankee]

I don't see any bias in the article, just both sides telling their story, and Cohen essentially acknowledging that the core claim is true: She paid to be listed on a map and wasn't. If you consider the machete incident damning, then why would you think he biased his article in favor of this woman? Sounds to me like it's a great inclusion for you to hate her bar, or whatever.

Last year. Why was this published the week after this year's event, then? Sounds like an unresolved vendetta. Also, 5 pages for $100 worth of crying in her coffee. I mean, she got her money back. If this was about the money, done deal.

Based on some of his comments in the Comments, sounds like Lomax wanted to get Cohen booted as organizer of this event with this article.

[kylejack]

Last year. Why was this published the week after this year's event, then?

Cohen posted a response to the article weeks before it was published, so Lomax has apparently been working on the article for a little while. WLN should be glad that Lomax did wait until after this year's event to publish. It could have come out the day before.

Sounds like an unresolved vendetta. Also, 5 pages for $100 worth of crying in her coffee. I mean, she got her money back. If this was about the money, done deal.

Because not everyone got their money back. There's another woman who owns Pepper's who also didn't get listed on the map, and didn't get a refund.

[heights_yankee]

Still seems much ado about nothing....

[LTAWACS]

Reading that Jlomax is the best reporter around, I'm scared of what bad reporting would look like.

Just look at the chronicle.

[LolaJRS]

Cohen posted a response to the article weeks before it was published, so Lomax has apparently been working on the article for a little while. WLN should be glad that Lomax did wait until after this year's event to publish. It could have come out the day before.

@KyleJack Whether it had come out the day before or 3 weeks before, it wouldn't have affected the number of people attending and having an excellent time. It's a great event. That our leading alternative newspaper dedicates a front-page article to a $100 grievance and "he said/she said" is the part that makes me shake my head.

For the most part, I greatly respect what Mr. Lomax does. Yet, "investigate journalism" (if that's what we're calling his piece) carries the burden of fallout. Framing some simple mistakes as "fraud" could as much as threaten someone's future job prospects. Even tone is not without its implications. And the omission of certain facts and "testimony" by a few close to the situation most assuredly reflects a bias. Even the title reflects a bias.

Scrutiny and oversight are legitimate. But Lomax, in his subsequent comments, clearly expresses his opinion that Mitch should not be running the event. That, my friend, reflects a bias. Period.

[kylejack]

Fraud is the word that HAAC's lawyer quoted in the article used, not Lomax. Lomax is reporting what the guy said, whether he's right or wrong. If Cohen or his associate's mistake about 501c3 designation and tax-deductible donations was honest, why would he send the correction to a much shorter list of people? Could it be because he was hoping to still get some more signups from those who were enticed by the charity aspect of the event? And if it was being promoted as a charity event, why did he submit a budget to HAAC that had all income being paid out to expenses? Why not just drop the charity charade?

I know that you and others know more about Cohen than me which is why I haven't speculated on his character beyond what's reported in the article.

[kylejack]

Harris has an aggravated assault deferred adjudication from 1990, so I wonder if that's the same incident. She was fined $300.

[T2T2]

Hello, Thank you for this topic.

I would like to share here what I posted in the comments section of the article:

"Cohen says he wanted to go back to the basics and have the event be by and for the Heights merchants ...."

"For her part, Betz believes White Linen Night has strayed far from the event's roots. 'We wanted this event to be for the community, not just one person.' She and Guide believe that the event could be even better than it is were it handled by a professional event planner, one who did not have a vested interest in an art market."

Owning an art market that offers booth space appears to qualify as being a merchant. A merchant who steps into the role of being the event's coordinator would appear to have two roles that can co-exist.

Local merchants seem to have a greater "vested interest" in the operations of WLN than an event planner would. Merchants proactively working together in their local area may be the ideal grass roots effort to sustain and enhance their community and livelihoods.

The art market adds a beneficial layer to the event by providing even more to enjoy while strolling down a closed street festival.

WLN is an event strong enough to sell itself without "fraud". When the coordinator has a long standing, current, and future interest in the community as a merchant via his art market, risking his livelihood and social ties is too high a wager to commit "fraud" over something that can easily sell itself.

It appears that a few people are trying to socially execute someone by twisting human fallibility into something criminal and malicious.

[s3mh]

Fraud is the word that HAAC's lawyer quoted in the article used, not Lomax. Lomax is reporting what the guy said, whether he's right or wrong. If Cohen or his associate's mistake about 501c3 designation and tax-deductible donations was honest, why would he send the correction to a much shorter list of people? Could it be because he was hoping to still get some more signups from those who were enticed by the charity aspect of the event? And if it was being promoted as a charity event, why did he submit a budget to HAAC that had all income being paid out to expenses? Why not just drop the charity charade?

I know that you and others know more about Cohen than me which is why I haven't speculated on his character beyond what's reported in the article.

But it is not clear in the article whether Lomax is directly quoting HAAC's lawyer or quoting Betz quoting the lawyer. Hearsay is a problem. Hearsay on top of hearsay is a bigger problem. Lomax is purposefully vague about the quote to get people to think that the lawyer thought so strongly that it was fraud that he was willing to go on the record with Lomax in the HP.

Also, according to the article, Cohen sent the correction to the people who had already signed up. You would want those people to know first because they are directly affected by the change. And getting a tax deduction on $125.00 is hardly going to be a material term for people who are deciding whether to participate or not. In the end, the for profit entity that ran the event still donated a portion of the proceeds to charity. WLN was never supposed to be a fundraiser. It would not have free admission for 40,000 people if the intent was to raise money. It was always supposed to be a big open house for Heights businesses, artists and performers. With some half-decent business and tax advice, it could have been run as a 501©3 and fairly compensated Cohen. But it looks like they just chose the path of least resistance and put all the tax issues to rest by having it run by a for profit entity. Not a bad idea considering the people with an ax to grind against Cohen and that the IRS lets people report what they believe are violations annonymously.